alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016038EN.01000602.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 November 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Verein für Konsumenteninformation v A1 Telekom Austria AG

(Case C-326/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2002/22/EC - Electronic communications networks and services - Users’ rights - Right of subscribers to terminate their contract without penalty - Changes to charges under terms of the contract - Increase in charges in line with increase in the consumer price index))

(2016/C 038/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Verein für Konsumenteninformation

Applicant:

Defendant: A1 Telekom Austria AG

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 20(2) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive), as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that a change in charges for the provision of electronic communications networks or services, resulting from the operation of a price adjustment clause contained in the standard terms and conditions applied by an undertaking providing such services, the term providing that such a change applies in accordance with changes in an objective consumer price index compiled by a public institution, does not constitute a ‘modification to the contractual conditions’ within the meaning of that provision, which grants the subscriber the right to withdraw from the contract without penalty.

---

(1)  OJ C 339, 29.9.2014.

1

---
**DoD 4000.25-2-M**

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP3.46. APPENDIX 3.46**

**SPECIAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENT MODIFIER**

## 

**AP3.50-**

AP3.46-1

APPENDIX 3.46
No. 10-7445.

#### Johanson Watson, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

562 U.S. 1184, 131 S. Ct. 1005,

178 L. Ed. 2d 836,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 873,

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
No. 10-11154.

#### Anthony Arthur Bush, Petitioner v. Cheryl K. Pliler, Warden, et al.

565 U.S. 870, 132 S. Ct. 222,

181 L. Ed. 2d 122,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7127.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 413 Fed. Appx. 996.
Exhibit 32.2

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cedric Kushner Promotions, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James
DiLorenzo , Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Cedric Kushner Promotions, Inc. and will be retained by Cedric
Kushner Promotions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.





/s/ James DiLorenzo
--------------------------------------------------------
Name: James DiLorenzo
Title: Acting Chief Financial Officer



Date: January 10, 2004
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 21


                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


1.       Elk Corporation of Dallas, A Delaware corporation, which owns all of
         the outstanding stock of (a) Elk Corporation of America, A Nevada
         corporation, (b) Elk Corporation of Alabama, a Delaware corporation,
         (c) Elk Corporation of Texas, a Nevada corporation, and (d) Elk
         Corporation of Arkansas, an Arkansas corporation.

2.       Chromium Corporation, a Delaware corporation.

3.       M Machinery Company (formerly known as Mosley Machinery Company,
         Incorporated), a Delaware corporation, which owns all of the
         outstanding stock of M Service Corporation, (formerly known as Mosley
         Service Corporation), a Delaware corporation.

4.       GA Industries Corporation (formerly known as Gory Associated
         Industries, Inc.), a Delaware corporation.

5.       OEL, LTD., d/b/a Ortloff Engineers, Ltd., a Nevada corporation.

6.       Ortloff de Venezuela, S.A., a Republic of Venezuela corporation.

7.       Elcor Service Corporation, a Nevada corporation.
1 of 2

Attachment

ADC 56

Approved DLMS Change (ADC) 56

Deletion of Obsolete Type of Media Codes 

1. ORIGINATOR:

a. Service/ Agency: Defense Logistics Management Standards Office (DLMSO), 

J-673, Suite 1834, 8725 John J Kingman Road, Ft. Belvoir, VA. 22060-6217.

b. Originator: Ms. Mary Jane Johnson, MILSTRAP System Administrator, DLMSO, 

703-767-0677, DSN 427-0677, or email: maryjane_Johnson@hq.dla.mil. 

2. FUNCTIONAL AREA: Supply.

3. REQUESTED CHANGE: 

a. Title: Deletion of Obsolete Type of Media Codes 

b. Description of Change: 

(1) The MILSTRAP/DLMS Type of Media code identifies the type of media to 

be used for transmittal of ICP requested transaction history. MILSTRAP System 

Administrator review of the Type of Media Code list revealed that it provided for 

submission of information using the technologically obsolete "punched card" format. 

The code also provides for other potentially outdated means of transmittal (magnetic 

tape and mail). This change proposes deletion of suspected obsolete Type of Media 

code values. 

 

(2) At Supply Process Review Committee Meeting 01-3, the Committee 

agreed the definition for Type of Media Code A should be revised to make it more 

generic. 

c. Procedures: Revise DLMS 1270 Qualifier Code "FB", and MILSTRAP, 

Appendix AP2.15, Type of Media Codes, to revise the definition for code ‘A’, and 

to delete codes ‘C’, ‘L’, and ‘T’ as follows:

CODE EXPLANATION

A Transaction images to be transmitted using DAASC methodologies for 

exchanging computer-readable transactions.1

1

See chapter 1, section C1.10, Communications, for an explanation of 

DAASC methodologies for transaction exchange.

C Transaction images to be transmitted in punched card format. Code Deleted.

L Listing of transaction history to be mailed. Code Deleted.

T Transaction images to be transmitted by magnetic tape. Code Deleted.
2 of 2

Attachment

ADC 56

4. REASON FOR CHANGE: This change documents an administrative update of the 

existing Type of Media Code list to eliminate code values which are no longer used, or 

required, due to advancements in technology. As part of staffing for PDC 68, 

Components were to advise if any of the code values proposed for deletion were still 

required, and should be retained. None were identified for retention.

5. ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES: 

a. Advantages: This change will eliminate obsolete Type of Media code values. 

b. Disadvantages: None known.

6. INTERFACE/IMPACT:

a. Interface: Requires interface between systems requesting transaction history, and 

those providing the requested history, to verify that the code values targeted for 

deletion are no longer used or required.

b. Impact: Requires revision to DoD 4000.25-2-M (MILSTRAP), DoD 4000.25-M 

(DLMS), and Component systems/procedures as necessary to delete the obsolete 

code values. System impact should be minimal since staffing/approval of this 

change should have confirmed that codes targeted for deletion were not being used.
No. 10-10774.

#### Kenneth Edward Watson, Jr., Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 849, 132 S. Ct. 170,

181 L. Ed. 2d 82,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6226.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 633 F.3d 929.
**CH 2**

**DoD 4000.25-2-M**

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP2.10. APPENDIX 2.10**

**ASSET TRANSFER STATUS CODE**

NUMBER OF CHARACTERS:	Two

TYPE OF CODE:	Alphabetic 

EXPLANATION: 	For response to the gaining inventory manager (GIM) follow-up request for asset data.  Also used for follow-up and reconciliation requests for due-in information pertaining to logistically reassigned items. 

RECORD POSITION:  	65-66

**AP2.9-**

AP2.10-1

APPENDIX 2.10
EXHIBIT 21.1

                                SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                                ------------------------------


The Company has the following subsidiaries, each of which is wholly owned by
the Company or by a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. Indented names
are subsidiaries of the company under which they are indented.


  Envirodyne Subsidiary, Inc. (Delaware)
  Envirosonics, Inc. (California)
  Viskase Corporation (Pennsylvania)
       Viskase Holding Corporation (Delaware)
            Viskase Australia Limited (Delaware)
            Viskase Brasil Embalagens Ltda. (Brazil)
            Viskase Europe Limited (United Kingdom)
                 Viskase S.A. (France)
                      Viskase Canada Inc. (Ontario)
                      Viskase GMBH (Germany)
                      Viskase Holdings Limited (United Kingdom)
                           Filmco International Limited (United Kingdom)
                           Viskase Limited (United Kingdom)
                                Viskase (U.K.) Limited (United Kingdom)
                                         Envirodyne S.A.R.L. (France)
                      Viskase S.p.A. (Italy)
                      Viskase Polska SP.ZO.O (Poland)
       Viskase Sales Corporation (Delaware)
            Viskase Puerto Rico Corporation (Delaware)
  Viskase Films, Inc. (Delaware)
  WSC Corp. (Delaware)
Order entered March 12, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 00019 - CV IN THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM L. MOORE, JR ., DECEASED

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Da llas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. PR - 17 - 0037 - 2



### O RDER Before the Court is appellants’ March 8, 2018 unopposed motion to extend time to file a brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to file to April 16, 2018

. /s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38159]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18785]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-639-000]


Midwestern Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Request Under 
Blanket Authorization

July 9, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 26, 1998, Midwestern Gas Transmission 
Company (Midwestern), P.O. Box 2511, Houston, Texas 77252-2511, filed 
in Docket No. CP98-639-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 
157.212 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 
CFR 157.205, 157.212) for authorization to operate an existing delivery 
point facility that was initially constructed under Section 311(a) of 
the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA), under Midwestern's blanket 
certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-414-000 pursuant to Section 7 of 
the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the request that is 
on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    The proposal states that Midwestern has recently constructed a 
delivery point (Purdue Farm Delivery Point) under Section 311(a) of the 
NGPA for use in the transportation of natural gas under Subpart B of 
Part 284 of the Commission's regulations. Granting this requested 
authorization will enable Midwestern to fully utilize the facility for 
all transportation services, pursuant to Section 311 of the NGPA and 
Section 7 of the NGA and will increase the transportation options of 
customers on Midwestern's system.
    Midwestern states that the proposed activity is not prohibited by 
its existing tariff and that it has sufficient capacity to accomplish 
the changes without detriment or disadvantage to other customers. There 
will not be an effect on Midwestern's peak day and annual deliveries 
and the total volumes deliveries will not exceed total volumes 
authorized prior to this request.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedures Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18785 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# C_2015016EN.01001502.xml

| 19.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/15

---

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 14 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim — Germany) — Sandy Siewert and Others v Condor Flugdienst GmbH

(Case C-394/14) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Rules of Procedure - Article 99 - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Long delay to a flight - Passengers’ right to compensation - Conditions exempting an air carrier from its obligation to pay compensation - Notion of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ - Aircraft damaged by a set of mobile boarding stairs in the course of a preceding flight)

(2015/C 016/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Rüsselsheim

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Sandy Siewert, Emma Siewert, Nele Siewert

Defendant: Condor Flugdienst GmbH

Operative part of the order

Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that a situation where, as in in the case before the referring court, an airport’s set of mobile boarding stairs collides with an aircraft cannot be categorised as ‘extraordinary circumstances’ exempting the air carrier from its obligation to pay the passengers compensation in the event of a long delay to a flight operated by that aircraft.

---

(1)  OJ C 372, 20.10.2014.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 32(A)

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
                         BY PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

      I, Daniel Greenberg, certify that the periodic report, to which this
Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained
in the periodic report to which this Statement is attached, fairly present, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
registrant.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Statement as of the
date first written above.

      Dated August 26, 2003

                                    /s/ Daniel Greenberg
                                    ------------------------------------
                                    Daniel Greenberg
                                    Chief Executive Officer


                                  Exhibit 32(A)
From: Rahul Pendse [RPendse@trinityconsultants.com]

Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 12:59 PM

To: Land, Eva

Subject: RE: DR-WC-01, PM2.5 emissions

Hello Eva,

You are correct. The PM/PM10 /PM2.5 emissions should be the same. Sorry for the confusion. The PM2.5 

emission for DR-WC-01 unit of the Discover Sprit should be 1.44 lbs/day and 0.02 tons per year based on 

24 hrs/day and 684 hrs/year operating time. Please let me know if you have any follow up questions.

P.S. – Please confirm the receipt of this email since I am having email issues on my end.

................................................................................................................

Rahul Pendse

Managing Consultant

Trinity Consultants – Baton Rouge

301 Main Street, Suite 900 | Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70825

Office: 225-346-4003 | Mobile: 714-454-0518

Email: rpendse@trinityconsultants.com

From: Land, Eva [mailto:Land.Eva@epa.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 10:09 AM

To: Rahul Pendse

Subject: DR-WC-01, PM2.5 emissions

Rahul,

When you get a chance, I have a question about the emission calculations for PM2.5 for the DR-WC-01 

unit. The detailed calculations can be found on page 194 of Appendix B in the December application. I 

am not sure why for this unit only the PM2.5 emissions are not the same as the emissions for PM and 

PM10. 

Thank you for your help.

Eva Land

Air Permits Section

EPA - Region 4

61 Forsyth St., SW

Atlanta, GA 30303

Phone: 404-562-9103
No. 10-10840.

#### Mark Coroado Reed, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 852, 132 S. Ct. 179,

181 L. Ed. 2d 89,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6088.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 421 Fed. Appx. 712.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18818]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Receipt of Letter of Intent To Submit a Petition for Federal 
Acknowledgement of Existence as an Indian Tribe

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is published in the exercise of authority delegated by the 
Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs by 
209 DM 8. Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.9(a) notice is hereby given that the: 
Mackinac Bands of Chippewa and Ottawa Indians, 132 North State Street, 
St. Ignace, Michigan 49781 has filed a petition for acknowledgment by 
the Secretary of the Interior that the group exists as an Indian tribe. 
The petition was received by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) on May 
13, 1998, and was signed by members of the group's governing body.
    This is a notice of receipt of a petition and does not constitute 
notice that the petition is under active consideration. Notice of 
active consideration will be sent by mail to the petitioner and other 
interested parties at the appropriate time.
    Under Section 83.9(a) of the Federal regulations, third parties may 
submit factual or legal arguments in support of or in opposition to the 
group's petition. Any information submitted will be made available on 
the same basis as other information in the BIA's files. Such 
submissions will be provided to the petitioner upon receipt by the BIA. 
The petitioner will be provided an opportunity to respond to such 
submissions prior to a final determination regarding the petitioner's 
status.
    The petition may be examined, by appointment, in the Department of 
the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Acknowledgment and 
Research, 1849 C Street, N.W., MS 4603-MIB, Washington, D.C. 20240, 
(202) 208-3592.
    Dated: June 1, 1998.

Hilda Manuel,
Deputy Commissioner of Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 98-18818 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-U
<TABLE>
                     ELIZABETHTOWN WATER COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY     Exhibit 12 
                 Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
<CAPTION>



                                             1996           1995           1994           1993           1992

<S>                                       <C>            <C>           <C>             <C>            <C>
EARNINGS:

Income before preferred stock dividends   $ 16,755,164   $ 17,325,144   $ 14,223,142   $ 14,832,519   $ 12,149,343
Federal income taxes                         8,822,537      9,161,510      7,413,995      7,916,794      6,021,464
Interest charges                            12,803,562     11,114,496     10,402,060     11,437,710     10,623,801
                                          ------------   ------------   ------------   ------------   ------------
Earnings available to cover fixed charges $ 38,381,263   $ 37,601,150   $ 32,039,197   $ 34,187,023   $ 28,794,608
                                          ============   ============   ============   ============   ============

FIXED CHARGES:

Interest on long-term debt                  13,011,069     10,892,129     10,774,008     11,527,301     10,516,521
Other interest                               2,640,117      2,343,903        175,507         77,921        514,122
Amortization of debt discount - net            361,012        323,557        319,646        224,383        209,631
                                          ------------   ------------   ------------   ------------   ------------
Total fixed charges                       $ 16,012,198   $ 13,559,589   $ 11,269,161   $ 11,829,605   $ 11,240,274
                                          ============   ============   ============   ============   ============    
        
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                2.40           2.77           2.84           2.89           2.56
                                          ============   ============   ============   ============   ============
<FN>





Earnings to Fixed Charges represents the sum of Income Before Preferred 
Stock Dividends, Federal income taxes and Interest Charges (which is 
reduced by Capitalized interest, divided by Fixed Charges. Fixed Charges
consist of interest on long and short-term debt (which is not reduced by
Capitalized interest and Amortization of debt discount.
Construction), Dividends on Preferred Stock on a pre-tax basis and 
Amortization of debt discount.
</TABLE>